Stroud District
Local Plan Review Emerging Strategy Consultation Report
May 2019
Development Services Stroud District Council Ebley Mill Stroud Gloucestershire GL5 4UB
The Planning Strategy Team 01453 754143 [email protected] visit www.stroud.gov.uk/localplanreview Contents
1. Emerging Strategy Consultation
Introduction 4 Consultation document 4 Making representations 5 Publicity 6 Notification 6 Public engagement 6 • Public exhibitions 6 • Town and Parish Council workshop 7 • Stakeholder meetings 8 • Other groups 9
2. Overview of the responses
Level of response 10 Method of response 11
3. What people told us
Key issues 13 Local economy and jobs 15 Our town centres 16 A local need for housing 18 Local green spaces and community facilities 20 A vision for the future 22 Strategic Objectives 24 The Emerging Growth Strategy 25 Settlement hierarchy 29 Settlement development limits 33 Mini vision and priorities 35 Potential sites and alternatives 37
41 4. What’s next?
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 2
Figures 1 Type of response 2 The cluster online respondents felt they identified most with 3 Level of support for the Top 5 issues 4 Level of support for ways of tackling Top 5 issues 5 Level of support for the Emerging Strategy’s approach to supporting the local economy and the creation of jobs 6 Level of support for the Emerging Strategy’s approach to supporting town centres 7 Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to housing needs and opportunities 8 Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to local green spaces 9 Level of support for the vision for 2040 10 Level of support for Strategic Objectives 11 Level of support for broad approach of the Emerging Growth Strategy 12 Level of support for identification of towns and villages for growth 13 Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to meeting Gloucester’s needs 14 Are any settlement in the wrong tier? 15 Level of support for approach to managing development in Tiers 4 and 5 16 Level of support managing the cumulative impact of growth on settlements 17 Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to managing settlement development limits 18 Level of support for proposals to allow some limited development beyond settlement development limits 19 Level of support for specific changes to existing settlement development limits 20 Level of support for the 8 cluster mini visions 21 Level of support for identified key issues and priorities for action
Tables 1 List of public exhibitions 2 Method of response 3 Level of support for growth at identified sites 4 No. of respondents who disagree identified settlements have growth potential 5 Identified settlements with growth potential 6 Level of support for growth at identified sites 7 New sites submitted through the Emerging Strategy consultation 8 Local Plan Review timetable
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 3
1. Emerging Strategy Consultation
Introduction
1.1 The Stroud District Local Plan identifies the housing, employment, retail and community development that is required to meet local needs up until 2031. It sets out the strategy for distributing development within the District and policies for protecting and conserving the natural and built environment.
1.2 The Council started the process of reviewing the current Local Plan in 2017 with an Issues and Options consultation stage. The Issues and Options Paper posed a series of questions to help focus consultation feedback across a range of topics:
• Key issues - What are the top issues, challenges and concerns facing the District? • Needs – How should we plan to meet local needs for jobs, town centres, housing, green spaces and community facilities? • Future growth strategy – How and where should development be distributed across the District? • Evidence and information – What additional studies will be required to inform the Local Plan Review?
1.3 A report of the main findings from the Issues and Options consultation is available to view at: https://www.stroud.gov.uk/media/640532/local-plan-review-issues-and-option-consultation- report.pdf
Consultation document
1.4 The comments helped to inform an Emerging Strategy paper which was published in November 2018. The document sets out the Council’s Emerging strategy for meeting development needs over the next 20 years but also highlights other options. It focuses on:
• Key issues – Have we identified top 5 issues for you? Do you agree with ways we intend to tackle them? • Needs – Do you agree with the ways in which the Emerging Strategy intends to support the local economy and the creation of jobs, the District’s town centres, meet local housing need, protect existing or deliver new local green spaces/community facilities?
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 4
• Future growth strategy – Do you support the broad approach of the emerging growth strategy? Have we identified the right towns and villages for growth? Do you support our approach to addressing Gloucester’s needs? • Evidence and information – What additional studies will be required to inform the Local Plan Review?
1.5 The paper was made available in hard copy to view at the 25 deposit point locations throughout the District, including Stroud District Council offices at Ebley Mill, town and parish council offices open to the public, public libraries, and the Tourist Information Centre (TIC) in Stroud.
1.6 The paper was published on the Council’s website, www.stroud.gov.uk/Stroud District Local Plan review along with links to a range of background information and relevant online resources.
1.7 The public consultation on the Emerging Strategy took place over a period of ten weeks from 16 th November 2018 until 18 th January 2019.
Making representations
1.8 Feedback to the Emerging Strategy paper was invited in a range of formats:
• An interactive online survey replicating the questions posed in the discussion paper • By email • By letter • An online call for sites: site submission form
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 5
Publicity
1.9 The ten week consultation was advertis ed in the local press in November 2017 and was also the subject of additional media
coverage online and in print.
1.10 Posters and leaflets were sent to all town and parish councils, deposit point libraries and the TIC in Stroud to give local publicity to the consultation and associated public exhibitions.
Notification
1.11 An e mail notification was sent to all statutory consultees, together with interest groups, local organisations, businesses, land agents, developers and local residents listed on the Planning Strategy consultation database, who had expressed a desire to be ke pt informed of the Local Plan process. Public engagement
1.12 In line with the Council’s Statement of Community Involvement (SCI), a wide variety of methods were used to promote the consultation and engage with interested parties:
Public exhibitions 1.13 Twelve public exhibitions were held around the District during November and early December 2018, the first half of the 10 week consultation period. They were located in town and parish offices or community halls and were held on weekdays (during the day and early evenings) or Saturday mornings to enable people who work full time to attend. The exhibitions were designed for people to drop-in and read more about the Local Plan Review process, talk to officers and also to informally feed-back their views. Table 1 below lists the date, time and location of the 12 public exhibitions.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCA L PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 6
Date Time Venue No. of people Thursday 13/11/18 14:30 – 18:30 Stonehouse Town Hall 60 Saturday 24/11/18 10:30 – 13:30 Stroud Sub Rooms 64 Monday 26/11/2018 14:30 – 18:30 Kingswood Village Hall 34 Wednesday 28/11/18 14:30 – 18:30 Painswick Town Hall 55 Saturday 01/12/18 10:30 – 13:30 Sharpness Village Hall 119 Monday 03/12/2018 14.30 – 18.30 Slimbridge Village Hall 87 Wednesday 05/12/18 14:30 – 18:30 Nailsworth Library 22 Saturday 08/12/18 10:30 – 13:30 Cam Parish Council Office 88 Tuesday 11/12/18 14:30 – 18:30 Dursley Methodist Church 60 Wednesday 12/12/18 14:30 – 18:00 Minchinhampton Youth Club 65 Monday 17/12/18 13:30 – 17:30 Wotton Town Hall 21 Tuesday 18/12/18 14:30 – 18:30 Hardwicke Village Hall 31 Total 706 Table 1: List of public exhibitions
1.14 Printed panels were set up at each exhibition, detailing key issues, local needs, the Emerging Growth Strategy and potential sites. These were interspersed with interactive activities where people could leave comments on post-it notes. Each venue had a large printed map of the District, for people to use coloured counters, representing different quantities of housing, to formulate their own development strategy. There was a ballot box stationed at each venue for people to anonymously submit a copy of their preferred strategy.
1.15 The exhibition was also on display at Cam Parish Council Offices, in January 2019, at the request of Cam Parish Council providing further opportunity for feedback.
Town and Parish Council workshop 1.16 All Town and Parish Councils within the Stroud District were invited to attend an afternoon workshop organised by the District Council’s Planning Strategy Team. The event took place on 8 January 2019 and representatives from 29 Town and Parish Councils attended.
1.17 With eight tables, each with representatives from a range of parish clusters around the District, the first part of the workshop focused on identifying the location for 6,000 new dwellings and discussing and developing a strategy for distribution of the housing. Each table was asked to place coloured counters, representing different amounts of housing, onto a large printed map. As a group they fed back their rationale for the chosen strategy to the other tables.
1.18 The second part of the workshop focused on a selection of potential sites within the Council’s Emerging Strategy and Town and Parish Councils were invited to identify key constraints and issues with the sites and suggest opportunities for development to provide benefits to local communities.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 7
1.19 In both workshops the groups were facilitated by Planning Strategy officers from the District Council and representatives from the Gloucestershire Rural Community Council (GRCC).
3Parish Councillors The Town and Parish Council workshop, held at the Subscription Rooms.
Stakeholder meetings
1.20 At each stage of the consultation process to date the Council has arranged individual meetings with a range of statutory consultees and other interested bodies to brief them on the Local Plan review process and encourage their engagement. At the Emerging Strategy stage the Council met with the following:
Association of Severn Estuary Relevant Authorities (ASERA) Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) Cotswold AONB Conservation Board Gloucester City Council Gloucestershire County Council (GCC) Highways England Gloucestershire Authorities Local Nature Partnership (LNP) South Gloucestershire Unitary Authority Stroud Building, Design and Architecture (BDA)
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 8
Other groups 1.21 Two workshop sessions were held with sixth form Geography and Sociology students from Rednock School, Dursley, on 12 th and 26 th March 2019. The sessions focused on young peoples’ perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of the Cam/ Dursley area and the potential opportunities and threats from planned strategic growth. Students also completed “postcards from the future”, setting out their aspirations for Cam and Dursley in 2040, and identified their priorities for planning a new community based on key Garden Community principles.
1.22 Following the workshops, the sixth form students designed their own questionnaire and conducted a survey of Year 7 – 11 tutor groups to gain wider school feedback on perceptions of the local area, attitudes to growth and young peoples’ priorities for future development.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 9
2. Overview of the responses
Level of response
2.1 Over the 10 week consultation period there were 3,861 visits to the Local Plan Review webpage. In total, 811 respondents submitted comments to the consultation. While some formal responses to the consultation cover views on a range of questions others were submitted in response to a single question or a site. This figure does not take account of comments written on post-it note activities during the public exhibitions or discussions held at stakeholder workshops. These comments will be analysed over the forthcoming months and will feed into the draft plan.
2.2 Responses were received from a variety of stakeholders including individuals, town and parish councils, councillors, statutory and non statutory organisations, landowners and developers. The majority (82%) of responses submitted were made by individuals. The full breakdown of responses is shown in Figure 1.
700 664
600
500
400
300
200 No. of No.respondents 100 65 34 29 14 5 0 Individual Agent/ Town and Parish Company/ Statutory Councillor Developer Council Organisation consultee
Figure 1: Type of response
2.3 Representations were received from 14 statutory consultees:
Cotswold District Council National Grid Environment Agency Natural England Forest of Dean District Council Network Rail Gloucestershire County Council (2 responses) Severn Trent Water Highways England Sports England Historic England Wessex Water Gloucestershire Joint Core Strategy (JCS) authorities
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 10
2.4 Representations were received from 34 town and parish councils:
Alkington Parish Council Leonard Stanley Parish council Berkeley Town Council Minchinhampton Parish Council Bisley with Lypiatt Ward Miserden parish Council Brimscombe and Thrupp Parish Council Moreton Valence Parish Council Cam Parish Council Nailsworth Town Council Chalford Parish Council North Nibley Parish Council Dursley Town Council Painswick Parish Council Eastington Parish Council Rodborough Parish Council Ham and Stone Parish Council Slimbridge Parish Council Hamfallow Paris Council Standish Parish Council Hardwicke Parish Council Stonehouse Town Council Harescombe Parish Council Stroud Town Council Haresfield Parish Council Tortworth Parish Meeting Hinton Parish Council Uley Parish Council Horsley Parish Council Upton St Leonards Parish Council Kings Stanley Parish Council Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish Council Kingswood Parish Council Wotton Town Council
2.5 Representations were received from 29 companies or organisations:
Contract Sign Services Minchinhampton and Rodborough Commons Committee Cotswold Gardening School Painswick Valleys Conservation Society Cotswold View (Dursley) Management Limited Real Stroud Valley People (RSVP) Cotswolds Conservation Board Selsley Community Group Campaign for the Protection of Rural England SIT Select Dursley Running Club and Dursley Rugby Club Slad Valley Action Group Dursley Town Trust Stagecoach West Ecotricity Stroudwater TextileTrust GFirst LEP The Canal & River Trust Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust The Conservative Party Gloucestershire Rural Community Cou ncil The Green Party Horsley Community Energy Group The Painswick Centre House Builders Federation Transition Stroud Nailsworth Community Land Trust Woodland Trust National Trust
2.6 Representations were received from 734 agents, developers, councillors and individuals.
Method of response
2.7 The submitted responses and comments were received in a variety of formats including an online questionnaire, an online site submission form, by e-mail and by letter. Of the 811 respondents, 347 (43%) sent comments by e-mail, 251 (31%) submitted their comments using the online questionnaire and 213 (26%) submitted their comments by post. and 17 (2%) used an online site submission form. These figures can be seen in Table 2 below:
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 11
No. of Method respondents Online questionnaire 251 (30.9%) Emailed comments 347 (42.8%) Letters 213 (26.3%) Total 811 Table 2: Number or responses by method 2.8 In addition to the 811 responses above, the Council received 28 valid site submission forms. These, together with new sites identified from other consultation responses, will be assessed separately as part of the 2019 Strategic Assessment of Land Availability (SALA).
2.9 During the consultation period the Council received two petitions; one with 720 signatures and the other with 52 signatures. Both requested the removal of PS29: North of Ganzell Lane, Dursley from the list of potential sites. A further petition with 3,483 signatures was received outside of the consultation period and related to building 12,800 houses during the Plan period and protecting the local environment. Details of the petitions have been published on the Council’s website and responses are provided in accordance with the Council’s constitution.
2.10 The 251 respondents who filled in the online questionnaire were asked which cluster they identified most with i.e. live, work or visit. A full breakdown of the results is shown in Figure 2.
90 82 80 75 70 60 50 49 40 30
No. of No.responses 20 12 9 8 7 6 10 3 0 Berkeley Cam & Stroud Stonehouse Outside the Wotton Cotswold Gloucester Severn Vale Dursley Valleys District Fringe
Cluster
Figure 2: The cluster online respondents felt they identified most with
2.11 Significantly more respondents (82, 75 and 49 respectively) identified themselves with Berkeley, Cam & Dursley and Stroud Valleys than with any other cluster in the District. In total 9 respondents who submitted their comments online lived outside of the District.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 12
3. What people told us...
3.1 This part of the report highlights the key findings from the questions answered by the 811 respondents. It is a high level summary report which will not show the results of every question asked in the consultation document but intends to cover a broad range of subjects. Full analysis of responses will be undertaken, along with the commissioning of other evidence studies, over the next few months, in preparation for the Draft Plan, which will be published for consultation in the Autumn 2019. The full timetable can be seen in Table 5.
3.2 This report does not report on comments collected during public exhibitions or stakeholder meetings and events mentioned in Chapter 1. The detailed analysis of these comments will be undertaken over the forthcoming months.
Key issues
3.3 In 2017, through the Issues and Options Paper, we suggested 40 Key Issues, challenges and needs facing the District, which we thought that Local Plan Review should address. These covered a range of areas, including the economy, affordable housing, the environment, health and wellbeing and delivery. Through the Issues and options consultation, we asked respondents to identify their Top 5. These are identified in Table 3 below.
Issue 1 Ensuring new housing development is located in the right place to create sustainable development. Issue 2 Conserving and enhancing Stroud District’s countryside and biodiversity including maximising the potential for a green infrastructure network across the District. Issue 3 Maximising the potential of brownfield and underused sites to contribute to housing supply. Issue 4 Developing strategies to avoid, reduce and mitigate the indirect impacts of development on the natural environment. Issue 5 Tackling the acute lack of affordable housing in the District. Table 3: Top 5 issues, challenges and concerns identified from responses to Issues and Options Paper
3.4 In the Emerging Strategy paper we asked you to confirm we had identified the Top 5 issues for you. The results from the 177 responses received to this question are displayed in Figure 3 and show that 103 (58%) confirmed that the Council had identified their Top 5 issues and 174 (42%) felt that we had not.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 13
120 103 100
80 74
60
40 No. of No.responses
20
0 Yes No
Figure 3: Level of support for the Top 5 issues
3.5 We then asked whether you agreed with the ways we intend to tackle the Top 5 issues. The results from the 169 responses received to this question are displayed in Figure 4 and show that 57 (34%) agreed, 111 (66%) disagreed and 1 (1%) agreed in part.
120 111
100
80
60 57
40 No. of No.responses
20 1 0 Yes No Partly
Figure 4: Level of support for ways of tackling Top 5 issues
3.6 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s key issues. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.7 Full analysis of other key issues raised and suggested alternative ways to tackle them will be undertaken in the forthcoming months.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 14
Local Economy and jobs
3.8 In 2017, through the Issues and Options Paper, we explained the role the Local Plan can have in providing certainty to the business community in terms of allocating further employment land to meet future business needs and by supporting existing businesses on key employment sites. We also highlighted some emerging trends and key challenges facing the local economy including the projected very small rise in people of traditional working age living in the District in the future and changes in working practices including home working and the need for faster broadband and potential structural changes in the pattern of future farming.
3.9 We then asked you questions including what you thought were the biggest challenges facing the local economy in Gloucestershire, whether there is a need for further employment land allocations and whether you support growth adjacent to the M5.
3.10 Taking into consideration your views, national policy and evidence where available, Section 2.1 of the Emerging Strategy paper detailed how the Emerging Strategy will seek to support the local economy and the creation of jobs. These include delivering:
• a clear economic strategy to support sustainable economic growth for the next 20 years • economic growth and additional jobs on and adjacent to existing high value employment sites and within the M5/A38 growth corridor • regeneration of under-utilised or low value employment sites for other uses provided this does not undermine key employment sectors • new employment sites of varying sizes and locations to meet the specific locational requirements of different sectors • support for affordable, low cost sites and premises with flexible terms for business start ups • opportunities to foster on-going employment-education links • new employment together with new housing to create sustainable communities and to reduce the potential for further out commuting • support for the faster roll out of broadband • support for co-working facilities particularly at town centres • continued support for appropriate farm diversification proposals subject to environmental criteria • a more flexible approach towards encouraging tourism businesses including accommodation, subject to more appropriate locational and environmental criteria.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 15
3.11 In the 2018 Emerging Strategy consultation we asked whether you agreed with the way in which the Emerging Strategy intends to support the local economy and the creation of jobs. The results from the 157 responses received on this question are displayed in Figure 5 and show that 76 (48%) agreed with the approach and 81 (52%) did not agree.
100
81 80 76
60
40 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 5: The level of support for the Emerging Strategy’s approach to supporting the local economy and the creation of jobs
3.12 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s broad approach to the local economy and jobs. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.13 Full analysis of all comments made regarding local employment and jobs, including alternative approaches to supporting the local economy and jobs and details of anything you feel we have missed, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months, along with the commissioning of a strategic employment land review.
Our town centres
3.14 In 2017, through the Issues and Options Paper, we outlined some of the changes in national shopping patterns, including the recent onset of e-retailing, which are providing a growing challenge to the traditional role and health of our town centres. However, there has also been a positive story to tell with the rise in locally sourced food and an emerging cafe culture.
3.15 We then asked whether you agreed with the options we set out for improving our town centres. Taking into consideration your views on town centres, national policy and evidence where available, Section 2.2 of the Emerging Strategy paper detailed how we will seek to support the District’s town centres. These include delivering:
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 16
Stroud
• improvements to the Merrywalks shopping centre and retail and leisure offer • the redevelopment of brownfield sites (including those identified in the Stroud Town Centre Neighbourhood Plan) for appropriate uses including housing, retail and leisure • improvements to Stroud station; and investigate the potential for an integrated transport hub • walking and cycling links to and from the Stroudwater canal and the wider Stroud valleys network
Nailsworth
• pedestrian improvements to Market Street • redevelopment of the town square area to provide a better retail and leisure experience, including new homes and open space • an improved and centrally located town council, library and tourism facility • improved walking and cycling links to the wider Stroud valleys network
Dursley
• brownfield sites for redevelopment for housing and town centre uses • access improvements to Market Hall, if practical • environmental improvements to Parsonage Street • urban design, signage and public realm improvements and other proposals as set out in the Dursley Neighbourhood Plan • improved walking and cycling links connecting with Cam and Uley
Wotton
• opportunities for town centre improvements facilitated by the provision of additional parking • priorities set out in the Community Plan Update 2016 • the Greenway cycle and walking route, subject to further feasibility work
Stonehouse
• better cycling and walking links, with signage to / from the canal to the wider Stroud valleys network • proposals set out in the Stonehouse Neighbourhood Plan
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 17
3.16 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you agreed with approach. The results are displayed in Figure 6 and show there is general support for the ways in which the Emerging Strategy intends to support the district’s town centres.
120
100 22 40 19 21 80 20
60
40 80 75 77 71 68 No. of No.responses 20
0 Stroud Nailsworth Dursley Stonehouse Wotton under Edge
Yes No
Figure 6: The level of support for the Emerging Strategy’s approach to supporting town centres
3.17 Full analysis of all comments made regarding town centres, including suggested alternative approaches and what you feel we have missed, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months.
A local need for housing
3.18 In 2017, through the Issues and Options Paper, we identified ways of addressing local housing needs that aren’t currently being addressed by the market, including opportunities to grow the rented sector and to meet those wishing to build their own homes. We also identified the need to identify ways for young people to be able to stay within rural neighbourhoods and to meet the needs of older people or those with disabilities through flexible forms of accommodation including ‘lifetime homes’. We asked you what your views were on housing need.
3.19 Taking into consideration your views, national policy and evidence where available, Section 2.3 of the Emerging Strategy paper detailed how the Emerging Strategy intends to meet local housing need. These include delivering:
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 18
• at least 638 new homes per year for a 20 year period • a mix of brownfield and greenfield allocated housing sites of varying sizes to ensure delivery is maintained throughout the plan period • opportunities to bring forward housing development on brownfield sites through the identification and potential allocation of sites appropriate for housing on the Brownfield Land Register • a proportion of affordable homes on all sites of 10 dwellings or above in urban areas and on all sites of above 5 dwellings in designated rural areas • additional affordable homes working with parish councils, co-operatives, community land trusts and community housing groups • minimum dwelling sizes, subject to evidence of need, to avoid town cramming • sites to meet the specific needs of local gypsies and travellers and travelling showpeople • a mix of dwelling types (1 bed, 2 bed, 3 bed, 4+ bed, flats, houses, bungalows, etc.) on Local Plan housing sites in proportion to identified local needs • design guidance that supports flexible accommodation to ‘lifetime homes’ standards and in support of healthy living • build to rent homes as a proportion of Local Plan housing sites, subject to local needs • exception sites for first time buyers and renters, subject to local needs • rural exception sites to meet local affordable needs • small scale housing in rural areas in the interests of social sustainability, subject to local community support through the preparation of neighbourhood plans • self and custom built homes to meet needs identified on the self and custom built register, through a combination of site allocations, proportionate development on Local Plan housing sites and rural exception sites • homes for older people, including sheltered, enhanced sheltered, extra care, registered care provision on Local Plan housing sites, designed to standards allowing people to live for longer in their own homes • housing for local people, including where appropriate, using local occupier clauses to ensure local housing needs are met within or adjacent to existing communities
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 19
3.20 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you agreed. The results from the 173 responses received on this question are displayed in Figure 7 and show that 61 (35%) supported the Emerging Strategy’s approach to housing need and 112 (65%) did not.
120 112
100
80 61 60
40 No. of No.responses
20
0 Yes No
Figure 7: Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to housing needs and opportunities
3.21 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s broad approach to local need for housing. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.22 Full analysis of all comments made regarding housing need, including suggested alternative approaches and what you feel we have missed, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months.
Local green spaces and community facilities
3.23 In 2017, through the Issue and Options Consultation Paper, we explained the role that the Local Plan can have in providing local green spaces and community facilities to meet local needs, delivering new or improved community facilities in association with new development and protecting existing places and spaces of value to local communities. We also highlighted challenges facing local communities from the loss of village pubs, shops and other local services and the need to provide for the changing needs of growing communities.
3.24 Taking into consideration your views on local green spaces, national policy and evidence where available, Section 2.4 of the Emerging Strategy paper detailed how the Emerging Strategy will seek to protect existing or deliver new local green spaces and community facilities. These include delivering:
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 20
• policy protection for important open spaces within settlements, outdoor recreation facilities, playing fields or allotments within or relating to settlements • a mapped GI network, linking urban areas to the wider countryside, identifying important habitats, landscape features, river and green corridors and ecological networks • a set of standards for local open space, sport and recreation facility provision, to guide future development • site opportunities to address shortfalls in local open space, sport, recreation and community facility provision and to address gaps in the GI network and enhance the network function • restoration of the derelict canal between Stonehouse and Saul Junction, reconnecting Stroudwater Navigation to the Gloucester & Sharpness Canal, including creating 30 hectares of biodiverse habitat and canal towpath • improvements to the Stonehouse to Nailsworth cycleway, including biodiversity improvement and resurfacing work; creation of the Cam, Dursley and Uley Greenway and potential to deliver a Wotton under Edge, Kingswood and Charfield Greenway • support for the identification of local green spaces through Neighbourhood Development Plans and the protection of community facilities through existing Assets of Community Value legislation • opportunities to address identified community needs in association with new development through the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and s106 agreements • support for the planned provision of community facilities alongside housing growth, through masterplanning of strategic and other major developments • continued protection of identified areas of biodiversity, landscape, and heritage importance • a mitigation strategy for the Cotswold Beechwoods SAC to assess and address recreational pressures including from growth within Gloucester.
3.25 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you agreed. The results from the 159 responses received on this question are displayed in Figure 8 and show that 76 (48%) showed support for the approach and 83 (52%) did not.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 21
100 83 80 76
60
40 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 8: Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to local green spaces
3.26 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s broad approach to local green spaces and community facilities. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.27 Full analysis of all comments made regarding local green spaces and community facilities, including suggested alternative approaches and what you feel we have missed, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months.
A vision for the future
3.28 The broad and over-arching vision set out in the current Local Plan, expressed aspirations for the future of our District up to 2031. We are looking to build on the current vision and to roll it forward to cover the next 20 years to 2040. In Section 3.1 of the Emerging Strategy paper, we only proposed some minor changes to the current Local Plan vision. It now reads:
Stroud District sits at the south-western edge of the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and extends westward across the Severn Vale, which is bordered by a rich estuarine landscape. This Vision draws upon our special environmental, social and economic qualities. Our rural District is living, modern and innovative. We are responding to climate change through reducing our CO2 emissions and adapting our lifestyles to live within our environmental limits. Our District supports a network of market towns, well connected to their rural hinterlands and complementary to the role of wider regional centres. Each contributes to our sustainable and thriving local economy. We capitalise on our heritage, skills, and knowledge – exploiting our unique assets to nurture growth in green technologies and creative
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 22
industries. We are adaptable and able to respond to changing needs and modern lifestyles. We enjoy a high quality of life within our healthy, vibrant and diverse communities, which have a strong sense of their own identity and local distinctiveness – from Wotton-under- Edge in the south, to Stroud Town in the centre and Upton St. Leonards in the north. They are all safe and secure places, where vulnerable people are supported. Every day we see the richness, diversity and beauty of our District. We nurture our high quality landscapes, our flourishing wildlife and our historic and cultural heritage, from our arts and crafts, through to the Cotswold Canals and our wool and cloth mills.
3.29 In the 2018 Emerging Strategy consultation we asked whether you agreed with the vision for 2040. The results from the 145 response to this question are displayed in Figure 9 and show that 80 (55%) agreed and 65 (45%) did not.
100
80 80 65 60
40 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 9: Level of support for the vision for 2040
3.30 Full analysis of all comments received regarding the vision, including suggested wording changes, alternative approaches and what you feel we have missed, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 23
Strategic objectives
3.31 Taking account of the identified issues and priorities, the current Local Plan lists six principal objectives to provide a more tangible way of taking forward the overall vision for the District, and to help us to assess the relative merits of potential locations for strategic growth. Having considered your views from the 2017 Issues and Option consultation, recommendations from the Council’s Sustainability Appraisal (SA), national policy section 3.2 of the 2018 Emerging Strategy paper refines the strategic objectives to take forward through the Local Plan Review as follows:
Homes and communities Strategic Objective SO1: Accessible communities Strategic Objective SO1a: Healthy, inclusive and safe communities
Economy and infrastructure Strategic Objective SO2: Local economy and jobs Strategic Objective SO3: Town centres and rural hinterlands Strategic Objective SO4: Transport and travel
Our environment and surroundings Strategic Objective SO5: Climate Change and environmental limits Strategic Objective SO6: Our District’s distinctive qualities
3.32 In the consultation on the Emerging Strategy we asked whether you agreed with the strategic objectives as drafted. The results are displayed in Figure 10 and demonstrate an overall support each of the seven objectives.
140 22 22 120 26 26 40 41 25 100
80
60 108 112 113 109 109 100 97 40 No. of No.responses 20
0 SO1 SO1b SO2 SO3 SO4 SO5 SO6
Yes No
Figure 10: Level of support for Strategic Objectives
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 24
3.33 Full analysis of all comments made regarding the Strategic Objectives, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months.
The Emerging Growth Strategy
3.34 The current Local Plan seeks to distribute growth through a strategy of concentrated development, focussed on a small number of strategic growth areas, within or adjacent to larger settlements, within the Stroud Valleys, to the north east of Cam, to the west of Stonehouse, south of Gloucester and to support regeneration of the docks at Sharpness.
3.35 We need to review this approach to ensure we can deliver the future growth requirements up to 2040. In 2017, through the Issues and Options Paper, four alternative patterns for future growth in the District were detailed. We asked what you thought of them; whether a combination or ‘hybrid’ might be another option; or whether there was an alternative. The four options were:
Continue to concentrate housing and employment development at a few large Option 1 sites located adjacent to the main towns in the District Take a more dispersed approach with some medium sized housing and Option 2 employment sites on the edge of the larger villages, as well as towns Disperse development across the District with most villages including at least Option 3 one small to medium site allocated to meet local needs Identify a growth point in the District to include significant growth, either as an Option 4 expansion of an existing settlement, or to create a new settlement
3.36 Taking into consideration your views on the growth strategy options, findings from the Sustainability Appraisal and Transport Assessment, the 2018 Emerging Strategy paper set out a hybrid approach in terms of distributing the growth:
• Concentrate housing growth at the main towns of Cam and Dursley, Stonehouse and Stroud • Housing and employment growth will also be centred at two new settlements at Sharpness and at Wisloe. Further strategic employment growth will also be concentrated at accessible locations within the A38/M5 corridor. • Modest levels of growth will be delivered at the local service centres of Berkeley, Minchinhampton, Nailsworth and Painswick • Lesser levels of growth will be delivered at the villages of Brimscombe, Kings Stanley, Kingswood, Leonard Stanley, North Woodchester and Thrupp • Further infill development to maximise the use of brownfield land will be supported at these and other settlements, within settlement development limits. • Some limited development at small and medium- sized sites (up to 20 dwellings) immediately adjoining settlement development limits at Tier 1-3 settlements will be allowed, to meet specific identified local development needs • At Tier 4 and 5 settlements, in addition to rural exception sites, the development of small sites of up to 10 dwellings outside settlement development limits will be supported in the interests of maintaining social sustainability, provided that the policy is supported by the local community through the making of a Neighbourhood Plan
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 25
3.37 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you supported the broad approach of the Emerging Growth Strategy, in terms of distributing the growth required by national policy for Stroud District. The results from the 188 responses received on this question are displayed in Figure 11 and show that 68 (36%) supported the broad approach of the Emerging Growth Strategy and 120 (64%) did not.
120 120
100
80 68 60
40 No. of No.responses
20
0 Yes No
Figure 11: Level of support for broad approach of the Emerging Growth Strategy
3.38 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this and the following question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s broad approach to the emerging growth strategy. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.39 We also asked whether we had identified the right towns and villages for growth. The results from the 148 responses received on this question are detailed in Figure 12 and show that 35 (24%) agreed and 113 (76%) did not.
120 113
100
80
60
40 35 No. of No.responses
20
0 Yes No
Figure 12: Level of support for identification of towns and villages for growth
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 26
3.40 Respondents who submitted their comments online were asked to clarify which settlements that the Emerging Growth Strategy paper identified as potentially suitable for growth, they disagreed with. The results from the 135 respondents who answered the question are displayed in Table 4. The highest number of respondents disagreed there was growth potential at Berkeley (38%), Newtown & Sharpness (38%), Dursley (29%), Slimbridge (24%) Wisloe (21%).
No. of % of total No. of % of total Settlement Settlement respondents respondents* respondents respondents* Amberley 13 10% Miserden 12 9%
Berkeley 51 38% Nailsworth 12 9% Newtown & Bisley 15 11% 53 39% Sharpness Brimscombe and 10 7% North Nibley 16 12% Thrupp North Cam 20 15% 7 5% Woodchester Chalford 14 10% Oakridge Lynch 10 7%
Coaley 15 11% Painswick 12 9%
Dursley 39 29% Slimbridge 32 24%
Eastington 7 5% Stroud 6 4% Frampton -on - 15 11% Stonehouse 4 3% Severn Hardwicke 7 5% Uley 27 20% Upton St Horsley 19 14% 5 4% Leonards Whiteshill & Kings Stanley 7 5% 5 4% Ruscombe Kingswood 5 4% Whitminster 7 5%
Leonard Stanley 6 4% Wisloe 28 21% Manor Village Wotton -under - 8 6% 10 7% (Bussage) Edge Minchinhampton 15 11% *Note. The columns will not add to 100% as some respondents highlighted more than one settlement. Table 4: No. of respondents who disagree identified settlements have growth potential
3.41 Respondents who submitted their comments online were also asked to identify any settlements, not listed in the Emerging Strategy, that they felt were potentially suitable for growth. The results from the 88 respondents who answered the question are displayed in Table 5. The highest
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 27
number of respondents identified the following as having growth potential: Newport (50%), Stone (30%), Cambridge (27%) and Brookthorpe (11%).
No. of % of total No. of % of total Settlement Settlement respondents respondents* respondents respondents* Arlingham 5 6% Newport 44 50%
Box 4 5% Nympsfield 6 7%
Brookthorpe 8 9% Old Bussage 4 5%
Cambridge 24 27% Randwick 3 3%
Cranham 3 3% Saul 6 7%
Eastcombe 6 7% Selsley 4 5%
France Lynch 4 5% Sheepscombe 5 6% South Haresfield 8 9% 5 6% Woodchester Hillesley 5 6% Stinchcombe 10 11%
Longney 6 7% Stone 26 30%
Middleyard 4 5% *Note. The columns will not add to 100% as some respondents highlighted more than one settlement. Table 5: Identified settlements with growth potential
3.42 The Joint Core Strategy for the Gloucester City, Tewkesbury Borough and Cheltenham Borough areas has identified that in the longer term additional sites will be required to meet Gloucester’s housing needs beyond 2028. Stroud District Council is committed to working together with these authorities and other authorities to Gloucestershire to identify the most sustainable sites to meet these future needs.
3.43 An assessment of potential alternative sites to meet Gloucester’s long term housing needs will be carried out during 2019. Possible sites to the south of Hardwicke and at Whaddon (within Stroud District) will form part of that assessment, together with other sites both within and on the edge of Gloucester but within neighbouring council areas. The site(s) that perform best will be identified in the respective council’s future draft plan(s) for potential allocation.
3.44 At that stage, if sites at Whaddon or South of Hardwicke are not needed to meet Gloucester’s immediate needs, then there is the potential to review how these sites might contribute to future needs and whether there is merit in them coming into the Stroud Local Plan with consequential changes to the strategy.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 28
3.45 In section 4.2 of the 2018 Emerging Strategy consultation we asked whether you support our approach to addressing Gloucester’s housing needs. The results from the 130 responses to the question are displayed in Figure 13 and show that 55 (42%) agreed with the approach and 75 (58%) did not.
100
80 75
60 55
40 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 13: Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to meeting Gloucester’s needs
3.46 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s broad approach to the emerging growth strategy. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.47 Full analysis of all comments made regarding the Emerging Growth Strategy, including suggested alternative approaches to the strategy and to addressing Gloucester’s housing needs, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months
Settlement hierarchy
3.48 The current Local Plan identifies a hierarchy of settlements, with the largest towns considered to be the most appropriate locations for significant levels of new homes and jobs. By contrast, the smallest are not identified to receive any growth, other than specific needs identified in Neighbourhood Plans.
3.49 In 2017, through the Issues and Options Paper, we asked whether the current hierarchy-based approach is the most appropriate way to identify which settlements are best suited to various levels of growth. We also asked what changes might be necessary in order to make the hierarchy more useful or relevant, and whether the individual settlements are correctly categorised within the five tiers.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 29
3.50 Since the Issues and Option stage of consultation further work has been undertaken by the Council to assess each settlement’s key characteristics and functions relative to other settlements in the District. We have refreshed the audit data of the services and facilities available within each settlement and expanded the analysis to include Tiers 4 and 5 as well as Tiers 1-3.
3.51 Refreshing the data and extending the analysis to cover Tiers 4 and 5 settlements, has suggested some changes to the current hierarchy. Section 4.3 of the 2018 Emerging Strategy paper detailed these changes:
• Painswick - move up from Tier 3 to Tier 2 • Brimscombe & Thrupp - move up from Tier 4 to Tier 3a • Frampton-on-Severn - move down from Tier 2 and Tier 3a • Miserden - new designation in Tier 3b • Box - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Brookthrope - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Cambridge - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • France Lynch - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Middleyard - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Nymsfield - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Randwick - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Stinchcombe - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5 • Stone - move down from Tier 4 to Tier 5
3.52 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you felt any settlements were in the wrong tier. We received 132 responses to this question and the results are displayed in Figure 14. It shows that 76 (58%) felt that there were settlements in the wrong tiers and 56 responses (42%) felt that no changes were required.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 30
100
80 76
60 56
40 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 14: Are any settlements in the wrong tier?
3.53 Taking into consideration your views on the settlement hierarchy from the 2017 Issues and Options consultation, national policy and evidence where available, section 4.3 of the Emerging Strategy paper set out the proposed approach to managing development. This includes:
• future growth targeted to settlements that have better access to services, facilities and infrastructure and which offer the best opportunities for sustainable development. • appropriate limitation on the amount, scale and nature of any development at lower tier settlements. • managed growth at each settlement, through a combination of site allocations and a policy framework that identifies an appropriate overall scale of growth, to be delivered through windfalls and other exceptions. • growth that is sustainable and proportionate to each settlement’s functionality, capacity and character, taking account of each settlement’s relative constraints and opportunities. • a policy framework that takes account of the cumulative impact of successive developments at a settlement, to ensure that the impacts of each individual proposal are seen in the context of the settlement’s overall capacity for growth over the lifetime of the Plan.
3.54 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you supported the proposed approach to managing development at small Tier 4 and 5 settlements by including them within the hierarchy and defining settlement development limits. We received 112 responses to this question and results displayed in Figure 15 show that 80 (71%) agreed with the approach and 32 (42%) did not.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 31
100
80 80
60
40 32 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 15: Level of support for approach to managing development in Tiers 4 and 5
3.55 A further question was asked whether you supported the idea that the Local Plan should seek to manage cumulative impacts of growth on individual settlements. We received 123 responses to this question and the results displayed in Figure 16 shows that 115 supported the idea and 8 did not.
120 115
100
80
60
40 No. of No.responses
20 8 0 Yes No
Figure 16: Level of support managing the cumulative impact of growth on settlements
3.56 Full analysis of all comments made regarding the settlement hierarchy, including suggested changes to the position of individual settlements within the hierarchy, pros and cons of approaches to managing development at small Tier 4 and 5 settlements and suggestions for how to develop a framework for managing the cumulative impact of growth on individual settlements, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 32
Settlement development limits
3.57 The current Local Plan manages growth on the edge of settlements by supporting development within tightly defined settlement development limits but resisting most forms of development beyond, except for a limited range of types of development defined as acceptable within the countryside.
3.58 In 2017, through the Issues and Options consultation document, we asked for comments on three suggested ways in which development proposals on the edge of towns and villages could be managed. The three options were:
Option 1 Continue with existing settlement development limits amended as necessary Assess proposals on a case by case basis using broader criteria (e.g. landscape Option 2 impact; form of settlement, proximity to services, etc.)Take a more dispersed Continue with settlement development limits but expand the types of Option 3 development that are allowed beyond them in the countryside
3.59 Having reviewed existing settlement development limits and taken into consideration your views, national policy and evidence were available, section 4.4 of the Emerging Strategy paper details a more flexible approach:
• housing, employment and community uses within existing settlement development limits, updated, where appropriate, to reflect physical changes since they were last reviewed and to better reflect their intended function
• some limited development beyond settlement development limits as set out in the Emerging Strategy, subject to satisfying detailed environmental and design criteria.
3.60 During the 2018 consultation we asked whether you agreed with the Emerging Strategy’s approach to maintaining settlement development limits. We received 149 responses to the question and the results displayed in Figure 17 show that 90 (60%) agreed with the approach and 59 (40%) did not.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 33
100 90
80
60 59
40 No. of No.responses 20
0 Yes No
Figure 17: Level of support for Emerging Strategy’s approach to maintaining settlement development limits
3.61 We then asked whether you supported the proposals to allow some limited development beyond settlement development limits. The results are displayed in Figure 18 and show that of the 135 responses we received in relation to Tiers 1-3, 67 supported the approach and 68 did not. It also shows that of the 125 responses we received regarding Tiers 4 and 5, 72 supported the proposal and 53 did not.
100
80 68 72 67 60 53
40
20 No. of No.responses
0 Tiers 1 -3 Tiers 4 and 5
Yes No
Figure 18: Level of support for proposals to allow some limited development beyond settlement development limits
3.62 Having reviewed existing settlement development limits and taking into consideration suggestions for changes put forward in the previous consultation, Appendix A of the Emerging Strategy paper detailed minor changes to a number of settlement development limits, to reflect physical changes since the last review and to better reflect their intended function in terms of managing growth.
3.63 We asked whether you support the specific changes and the results which are displayed in Figure 19 highlight an overall support for the changes.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 34
SDL - BER01 at Lynch Road 30 9 SDL - CAM01 at Strawberry Field / Elstub Lane 33 5 SDL-CBR01 at Narles Road / Barton Field 25 6 SDL -CBR02 at Ryalls Court 25 2 SDL-DUR01 at Shearing Close, Littlecombe 34 5 SDL -EAS01 at Swallowcroft 27 3 SDL-EAS02 at Alkerton Farm, rear of Bath Road 27 4 SDL -HAR01 at Sellars Road 25 4 SDL-HIL01 at no.s 1-3 Alderley Road 25 2 SDL -HOR01 at Sealey Wood Lane / Nupend Farm 28 3 SDL-HOR02 at The Chooks / Willow Barn 30 2 SDL -HOR03 north of The Street; 30 2 SDL-HOR04 at The Priory 29 2 SDL -KST01 at Dyehouse Field / off Woodside Lane 24 3 Settlement SDL-LEO01 at Lyndon Morgan Way / Marsh L 24 4 SDL-MID01 at Coldwell Close 24 3 SDL -MIS01: an entirely new settlement … 18 12 SDL-NEW01 at Cromwell Close / south of … 24 9 SDL -STN01 at Vale Orchard 26 3 SDL-STO01 at Brunel Way / Oldends Lane 24 4 SDL -STR02 at Bowbridge Wharf 24 2 SDL-ULY01 at Goldingham Close 23 2 SDL -WHI01 at Schoolfield Close 23 2 SDL-WHI02 at Upton’s Garden 23 3 SDL -WHI03 at Wheatenhurst Cottage, Hyde Lane 23 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 No. of responses
Yes No
Figure 19: Level of support for specific changes to existing settlement development limits
3.64 Full analysis of all comments made regarding alternative approaches to maintaining settlement development limits, alternative proposals for allowing some limited development beyond settlement development limits and suggestions for further changes to settlement development limits, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months
Mini visions and priorities
3.65 To meet the current issues and needs facing people and places in Stroud District, we identify an over-arching vision for the District as a whole and set out a possible growth strategy. However, whilst some places in the District have a need for development or are suitable for strategic levels of growth, others are not.
3.66 During the 2017 Issues and Options consultation, we discussed with local community representatives what made their places special and what was important to retain – as well as
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 35
what needed to change. We have used these conversations to review the eight “mini-visions” set out in the current Local Plan.
3.67 In section 5.0 of the 2018 Emerging Strategy paper, we asked whether you supported our proposed mini-visions for your area(s). The results displayed in Figure 20 show that there is overall support for each of the cluster visions, except the Berkeley Cluster where considerable more response did not support the vision (70 responses) compared to responses who supported it (13 responses).
100
80
60
21 70 40 10 6 7 5
No. of No.responses 9 20 7 34 36 25 26 19 24 21 13 0 Stroud Stonehouse Cam & Gloucester Berkeley Severn Wotton Cotswold Valleys Dursley Fringe Cluster
Yes No
Figure 20: Level of support for the 8 cluster mini visions
3.68 We also asked whether you supported the identified key issues and priorities for action for your area(s). The results in Figure 21 show that there were more responses received in support than not in support for the identified issues and priorities for each of the cluster visions, except the Berkeley Cluster where considerably more responses received did not support the key issues and priorities (53 responses) compared to responses who supported them (20 responses).
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 36
100
80
60
53 40 22 9
No. of No.responses 5 20 9 5 7 7 30 23 24 20 17 14 16 12 0 Stroud Stonehouse Cam & Gloucester Berkeley Severn Vale Wotton Cotswold Valleys cluster Dursley Fringe Cluster Cluster cluster Cluster
Yes No
Figure 21: Level of support for identified key issues and priorities for action
3.69 There appears to be a correlation between responses received to this question and responses received about particular sites. For example, a respondent opposed to the allocation of a particular site in the Emerging Strategy has also disagreed with the Council’s broad approach to mini visions and priorities. Further analysis will be undertaken to understand the context to the responses received.
3.70 Full analysis of all comments made regarding alternative wording of any of the mini visions or other important issues and priorities you have highlighted, will be undertaken in the forthcoming months
Potential sites and alternatives
3.71 In preparation for the 2017 Issues and Options consultation, the District Council undertook an initial broad assessment of land around the main towns and villages within Stroud District - those identified in the current Local Plan as Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3. Views were welcomed on whether, if future housing, employment or community uses were required, the Council had identified the best sites or whether there were better alternative or additional locations or sites.
3.72 In preparation for the 2018 Emerging Strategy consultation, the District Council has continued to assess the development potential of land within and around the main towns and the larger villages in Stroud District – those identified in the current Local Plan as Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 settlements. We have looked again at the broad locations identified in the Issues and Options Paper and new sites promoted to us.
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 37
3.73 In section 5.0 of the Emerging Strategy paper 41 potential sites were identified and mapped and 2 other possible sites were identified on the Gloucester Fringe. We asked you whether you thought we had identified the best sites at the settlements that are highlighted as most suitable for growth, or whether alternative sites may be suitable. The results in Table 6 show the level of support and opposition for each site.
No. of responses Potential site Settlement Support Oppose PS01 Brimscombe Mill Brimscombe and Thrupp 34 8 PS02 Brimscombe Port Brimscombe and Thrupp 36 9 PS03 Land at Hope Mill Brimscombe and Thrupp 32 10 PS04 South of Cirencester Road Minchinhampton 29 11 PS05 East of Tobacconist Road Minchinhampton 27 14 PS06 The New Lawn, Nailsworth Nailsworth 29 8 PS07 North of Nympsfield Road / Nailsworth 27 11 Nortonwood Junction PS08 North of Avening Road Nailsworth 25 4 PS09 Rooksmoor Mill North Woodchester 29 5 PS10 Railway land / car parks, Cheapside Stroud 39 6 PS11 Merrywalks Arches, Merrywalks Stroud 42 4 PS12 Police station / Magistrates court, Stroud 39 5 Parliament Street PS13 Central river / canal corridor Stroud 42 6 PS14 Stanley Mills Kings Stanley 33 6 PS15 North of Kings Stanley Primary Kings Stanley 31 7 School PS16 South of Leonard Stanley Primary Leonard Stanley 32 13 School PS17 Magpies site, Oldends Lane Stonehouse 34 4 PS18 Land to rear of Regents Street Stonehouse 30 7 PS19a North/north west of Stonehouse Stonehouse 34 6 PS19b North/north west of Stonehouse Stonehouse 33 7 PS20a M5 Junction 13 Stonehouse 39 9 PS20b M5 Junction 13 Stonehouse 39 10 PS21 Land adjacent to Tilsdown House Cam 50 11 PS22 Coaley Junction Cam 53 12 PS23 Rear of 4 -60 Draycott Cam 51 10 PS24 West of Draycott Cam 48 20 PS25 East of River Cam Cam 44 18 PS26 Land off Acacia Drive / Oak Drive, Dursley 47 7 Kingshill PS27 1 -25 Long Street Dursley 46 7 PS28 The Old Dairy / Land off Prospect Dursley 46 6 Place PS29 North of Ganzell Lane Dursley 24 113 PS30 Hunts Grove Extension Hardwicke 42 6 PS31 Quedgeley East Hardwicke 41 6
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 38
PS32 South of M5/J12 Hardwicke 45 6 PS33 Northwest of Berkeley Berkeley 49 44 PS34 Sharpness Docks Newtown and Sharpness 72 31 PS35 Land at Focus School, Wanswell Newtown and Sharpness 64 35 PS36 South and east of Newtown and Newtown and Sharpness 42 141 Sharpness PS37 Land at Wisloe Wisloe 39 83 PS38 South of Wickwar Road Kingswood 38 7 PS39 South of Walk Mill Lane Kingswood 36 6 PS40 North of Katherine Lady Berkeley Wotton-under-Edge 36 7 School PS41 Washwell Fields Painswick 29 16 G1 South of Hardwicke Hardwicke 34 197 G2 Land at Whaddon Whaddon 28 28 Table 6: Level of support for growth at identified sites
3.74 Through the Emerging Strategy consultation 35 new sites were submitted to the Council for consideration. These sites are listed in Table 7 below. Full analysis of all comments made on the potential and alternative sites, and an assessment of all new sites will be undertaken in the forthcoming months
Site name Settlement Promoter Land attached to Foxfield House Berkeley Individual Land East of Taits Hill Road Cam CBRE Ltd Land at Upthorpe Farm (part) Cam Harris Lamb D E Spencer and Sons Eastington Ridge and Partners LLP Land adjoining Oldbury Lodge Eastington Individual Land south -east of Chipmans Platt roundabout Eastington Individual Field north of Travelodge at Chipmans Platt Eastington Individual Land south and east of Cressington Cottages Eastington Individual Frocester Manor Frocester New Dawn Homes Ltd Land at Moreton Valence Hardwicke Gloucestershire Conservatives Land to east of A38 at Moreton Valence Hardwicke Ridge and Partners LLP Land west of 3 The Cottages Haresfield Osprey Partners Limited Land east of Gloucester Road (B4008) Haresfield Strutt and Parker Land west of Gloucester Road (B4008) Haresfield Strutt and Parker The Orchard Horsley Individual Land west of Renishaws Kingswood Ridge and Partners LLP Land north and west of 10 - 14 Charfield Road Kingswood Boyer Planning Part land to the north of Bath Road Leonard Stanley Ridge and Partners LLP Land off Dozule Close Leonard Stanley Bruton Knowles Land to the West of Walnut Tree House Plan -A Planning and Middleyard Development Limited The Old Builders Yard Plan -A Planning and Minchinhampton Development Limited Land on north side of Woefuldane B ottom Minchinhampton SF Planning
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 39
Land south of Avening Road Nailsworth Rapleys LLP Additional land at Newtown and Wanswell Newtown Ridge and Partners LLP Land to west of New Road North Nibley David James and Partners Actrees Farm Newport WebbPaton Land at Clattergrove Painswick Chilmark Consulting Ltd M D Collins Steel Buildings Ltd Slimbridge David James and Partners Land south of Slimbridge (Wisloe) roundabout Slimbridge Savills Land to east of A38 at Stone Stone David James and Partners Stagholt Farm Stonehouse Individual Part land south of the High Street Upton St Leonards Individual Land at Upton Lane Upton St Leonards Bruton Knowles Land at Jaxons Farm Whitminster Barton Willmore Land at Hawpark Farm Wotton Under Knight Frank Edge Table 7: New sites submitted through Emerging Strategy consultation
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 40
4. What’s next?
4.1 We are currently carrying out a detailed analysis of all of the representations received as part of the Emerging Strategy consultation. The Council will be commissioning various technical studies to identify and assess development requirements for the period 2020-40, re-assessing strategy and site options and identifying draft policies and proposals for the Draft Plan stage.
4.2 We intend to publish further information in Autumn 2019 on how comments received have informed the preparation of the Draft Plan.
4.3 The next main public consultation stage will take place in Autumn 2019 in accordance with the published timetable for the Stroud District Local Plan Review:
Stage Timing Details Issues and options Autumn 2017 An opportunity to discuss emerging issues and consultation identify ways of distributing and managing future development needs Preferred options Autumn 2018 We should know much more about quantifying consultation development needs by this time and about future preferred options and alternatives Final draft plan Autumn 2019 A final chance to check that we have the right consultation draft plan in place Pre-submission Autumn 2020 The formal stages of making representations on consultation the plan Modifications Summer 2021 Consultation on any proposed modifications to the plan Adoption Winter 2021/22 Adoption
Table 8: Local Plan Review timetable
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 41
STROUD DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 42
Development Services Stroud District Council Ebley Mill Stroud Gloucestershire GL5 4UB
The Planning Strategy Team 01453 754143 [email protected] visit www.stroud.gov.uk/localplanreview
STROUD DISTRICT LOCA L PLAN REVIEW | REPORT OF CONSULTATION Page | 43